Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Well, that's got to be a classic statement. I don't much about it, but I'm sure about that guy. Watch the movie The Assassination of Jesse James. It's about how a criminal (Jesse) can come to see the light or become enlightened and yet continue to be in the relative what he has always been. So even if this heinous turd Andy is not enlightened, I don't think there's any law of nature that he can't be. --- sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why can't a pedophile be in UC? I don't know about a pedophile, I'm not exactly the expert on UC, but this guy sure ain't in it. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: Why can't a pedophile be in UC? I don't know about a pedophile, I'm not exactly the expert on UC, but this guy sure ain't in it. FWIW: A person who preys sexually on post-pubertal children is technically not a pedophile. Pedophiles--those who prey on prepubertal children-- have a severe sexual disorder and are (as far as we know) incurable. Therapy can help them resist their urges but will never eliminate them. Being attracted to young people past the age of puberty is considered completely normal sexually, although it's socially unacceptable (in our era, at least).
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
God, Judy, another fine statement. If you keep it up, I'll have to worship your ass before long. --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: Why can't a pedophile be in UC? I don't know about a pedophile, I'm not exactly the expert on UC, but this guy sure ain't in it. FWIW: A person who preys sexually on post-pubertal children is technically not a pedophile. Pedophiles--those who prey on prepubertal children-- have a severe sexual disorder and are (as far as we know) incurable. Therapy can help them resist their urges but will never eliminate them. Being attracted to young people past the age of puberty is considered completely normal sexually, although it's socially unacceptable (in our era, at least). Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Angela Mailander wrote: God, Judy, another fine statement. If you keep it up, I'll have to worship your ass before long. It always seems to come back to sex with you guys. Why is that? Why can't a pedophile be in UC? I don't know about a pedophile, I'm not exactly the expert on UC, but this guy sure ain't in it. FWIW: A person who preys sexually on post-pubertal children is technically not a pedophile. Pedophiles--those who prey on prepubertal children-- have a severe sexual disorder and are (as far as we know) incurable. Therapy can help them resist their urges but will never eliminate them. Being attracted to young people past the age of puberty is considered completely normal sexually, although it's socially unacceptable (in our era, at least).
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FWIW: A person who preys sexually on post-pubertal children is technically not a pedophile. Pedophiles--those who prey on prepubertal children-- have a severe sexual disorder and are (as far as we know) incurable. Therapy can help them resist their urges but will never eliminate them. Being attracted to young people past the age of puberty is considered completely normal sexually, although it's socially unacceptable (in our era, at least). Thank you for making this distinction. Yes, after puberty, I guess it is a matter of consent, at least according to the law. There are strong sentiments that argue that sex between adults and minors should not be forbidden-at least under some circumstances. Most states have the age of consent at 17, or in some cases 16, I believe.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It always seems to come back to sex with you guys. Why is that? We like to talk about sex Richard. You seem to get snagged on it. Why is that?
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Duveyoung wrote: I try to track what he's doing -- now and then -- so that I can at least be sure he's not offering courses -- especially in Fairfield. If I find out he's doing anything in public and it's, say, within a thousand miles, I'm going to drive there and confront him in the most rageful fashion I can without getting arrested. You should probably be arrested now for breaking the law - the last time I checked, it was unlawful in Wisconsin to call someone a 'pedophile' by name on a public forum without any proof. But, you're posting here annonymously, so I guess that says a lot in itself. However, if I were Andy I'd be the one tracking you down in a rageful fashion and sueing you for a million dollars. But's what is really pathetic is that not a single respondent on this forum seems to object to your blatant lying. If your accusations are true, then you're guilty of withholding information when these alleged crimes took place. You are all guilty for perpetuating the sex cult of the Marshy - most of you knew better, but you let yourself get brain washed. So, if you were lying for all those years, who in hell would believe a thing any of you have to say now? You all seem to have drunk the kool-aid.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
It always seems to come back to sex with you guys. Why is that? We like to talk about sex Richard. I don't recall you talking about your private sex life. Did I miss something? What's up with that? You seem to get snagged on it. Maybe so, but I draw the line at worshipping Judy's ass - I already told you I'm not gay! Why is that? Because it's funny?
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Uh Richard. Edg never claimed to have first hand knowledge of this person's exploits. He relayed infomation from someone he considered a reliable source. His account was then later substantiated by someone with first hand knowledge. People have various reason for not reporting crimes or indiscretions. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Richard J. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Duveyoung wrote: I try to track what he's doing -- now and then -- so that I can at least be sure he's not offering courses -- especially in Fairfield. If I find out he's doing anything in public and it's, say, within a thousand miles, I'm going to drive there and confront him in the most rageful fashion I can without getting arrested. You should probably be arrested now for breaking the law - the last time I checked, it was unlawful in Wisconsin to call someone a 'pedophile' by name on a public forum without any proof. But, you're posting here annonymously, so I guess that says a lot in itself. However, if I were Andy I'd be the one tracking you down in a rageful fashion and sueing you for a million dollars. But's what is really pathetic is that not a single respondent on this forum seems to object to your blatant lying. If your accusations are true, then you're guilty of withholding information when these alleged crimes took place. You are all guilty for perpetuating the sex cult of the Marshy - most of you knew better, but you let yourself get brain washed. So, if you were lying for all those years, who in hell would believe a thing any of you have to say now? You all seem to have drunk the kool-aid.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
On May 17, 2008, at 9:32 AM, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: Thank you for making this distinction. Yes, after puberty, I guess it is a matter of consent, at least according to the law. There are strong sentiments that argue that sex between adults and minors should not be forbidden-at least under some circumstances. Most states have the age of consent at 17, or in some cases 16, I believe. I think in Andy's case someone mentioned 10. Either way, the whole secrecy aspect makes it pretty revolting, to say the least. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think in Andy's case someone mentioned 10. Either way, the whole secrecy aspect makes it pretty revolting, to say the least. Of course. But it is nice to get the terms straight.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Sal wrote: I think in Andy's case someone mentioned 10. Either way, the whole secrecy aspect makes it pretty revolting, to say the least. So, why did you keep it a big secret, Sal?
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
lurk wrote: He relayed infomation from someone he considered a reliable source. His account was then later substantiated by someone with first hand knowledge. People have various reason for not reporting crimes or indiscretions. It's against the law to not report a crime. It's also against the law to post hearsay information about people to a public forum when your'e calling them a 'pedophile' - that's a little more than just an 'indiscretion'. Marshy may have committed indescretions, but that was hardly against the law in flea-town, was it?
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So it always does seem to come down to how you operate or express whatever your knowingness is in the world. In my own head I keep coming back to New.Morning's definition of any enlightenment worth having is one that generates positive effects both in the individual and in the individual's sphere of influence (and therefore, by extrapolation, to the world at large). Hi Marek, We are thinking the same thing. And while I probably used the words above, I tend to shy away from the term and label enlightenment-- or any derivitives, awakening etc. All such use of labels takes the focus, discussions and eyes off of the prize - the flowering of human virtues -- inner and outer. Witness today's discussions, paraphrasing and funning a bit, 'E people act perfectly'. 'That person can't be E because they don't act the way I think they should.' 'E'er can rob banks and trains'. 'you are stupid if you think an E'er could act like that'. etc. All of these great discourses have lost any focus (or celebration) of human virtues. They are about a much less interesting and useful topic, IMO, that is, 'my understanding is superior to your understanding', and 'you really suck since your understanding is inferior'. I love your characterization below -- someone who knows the Tao flows with circumstances as they develop and utilizes everything that comes his/her way with grace and kindness and intelligence. Patience, forebearance, humility, friendliness, compassion, happiness -- good qualities, all, and what I desire for myself and others as the anticipated and growing fruits of awakening. Or even as my old SRM lapel pin has inscribed around the little bas-relief image of Guru Dev: Peace, Energy, Happiness -- that's good enough for me. I am inclined towards people who have grace, kindness, intelligence, patience, forebearance, humility, friendliness, compassion, happiness, peace, energy and happiness. I am inclined towards practices and lifestyles that seem to bear that fruit within me. Does the discussion come up, 'Does a person who has grace, kindness, intelligence, patience, forebearance, humility, friendliness, compassion, happiness, peace, energy and happiness rob banks, scam investors or prey on recently pubescent boys?' Such a person might, but would be rare, IMO. If a person with the above qualities did 'bad stuff' -- well then the good news is that there are even more good qualities left to be absorbed into ones life (blood and breath). In contrast, when the E label is seen as paramount, then the discussion is about labels and why 'my label is better than your label'. Few human virtues in that discussion, IMO. Getting people hooked on the label Enlightenment (its just a word for god's sake) is one of MMY's great plays (IMO). As an aside, I think MMY was a genius, in that he loved a great 'mind-fuck'. MFs are a great path to dissolving and boundaries -- and these are human virtues). Much of the odd and IMO silly discussion about MMY actions and interactions with staff neglect his (not so) hidden agenda, he gave great MF to dissolve boundaries and attachments of those he loved. And he loved everyone so it was open season with MF's. Clearly he was successful in getting people hooked on the label Enlightenment. People are so wrapped up in it, they can't identify or distinguish it -- like a fish can't distinguish water. Its (become for them) a fundamental factor of life. The light filling part of the MF is when sees the snake is seen a just a rope -- that E. is just a word. IME, its quite liberating when the big E word is seen as that -- and one's attention is more drawn to 'real things' -- grace, kindness, intelligence, patience, forebearance, humility, friendliness, compassion, happiness, peace, energy and happiness. I think when the attachment to E, both as a verbal construct behind ones life, goals and thinking, as well as the view of it as a thing people 'have', a whole bucket (SL) of other attachments goes down the toilet at the same time. E'er is short for Error. When I hear discussions of E, I chuckle and think, Great one, oh great one! (as in oh great one as Ed McMahan used to say of Johnny Carson's jokes)
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andy was talking about This was posted anonymously to FFL by someone claiming to be the mother of a boy who had just such an encounter: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/9592 One sick bastard. Established in UC? No way. Just another pathetic pedophile. Yes, but I see the Ved, rising in a bright golden glow from his soul, all part and parcel of the effulgence of my unbounded, pristine, bliss centered Self.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: sandiego108 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: Why can't a pedophile be in UC? I don't know about a pedophile, I'm not exactly the expert on UC, but this guy sure ain't in it. Unless enlightenment turns you into a sexual deviant. :D Enlightenment enables you to see your Self in all beings (pre-pubecent, recently pubescent, and far too long ago pubescent), and all beings in the Self. So when someone tells an E'er to go fuck yourself -- its unfathomable what they might do.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: Andy was talking about This was posted anonymously to FFL by someone claiming to be the mother of a boy who had just such an encounter: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/9592 One sick bastard. Established in UC? No way. Just another pathetic pedophile. Yes, but I see the Ved, rising in a bright golden glow from his soul, all part and parcel of the effulgence of my unbounded, pristine, bliss centered Self. lol- put down the bong...
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: God, Judy, another fine statement. If you keep it up, I'll have to worship your ass before long. Thanks, Angela. I should add that while it's sexually normal for an adult to be attracted to adolescent children, acting on that attraction is socially unacceptable because it is frequently very harmful to the children psychologically (although not always, depending on the situation). That it's sexually normal, in other words, does not exonerate the predator. It's a clinical distinction, not an ethical one. --- authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander mailander111@ wrote: Why can't a pedophile be in UC? I don't know about a pedophile, I'm not exactly the expert on UC, but this guy sure ain't in it. FWIW: A person who preys sexually on post-pubertal children is technically not a pedophile. Pedophiles--those who prey on prepubertal children-- have a severe sexual disorder and are (as far as we know) incurable. Therapy can help them resist their urges but will never eliminate them. Being attracted to young people past the age of puberty is considered completely normal sexually, although it's socially unacceptable (in our era, at least).
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 17, 2008, at 9:32 AM, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: Thank you for making this distinction. Yes, after puberty, I guess it is a matter of consent, at least according to the law. There are strong sentiments that argue that sex between adults and minors should not be forbidden-at least under some circumstances. Most states have the age of consent at 17, or in some cases 16, I believe. I think in Andy's case someone mentioned 10. It's actually rather unlikely that he would have gone after a child that young (presumably prepubertal) if he also preyed on children who were postpubertal. Generally, if one is attracted to prepubertal children, one is not attracted to those past puberty, or to adults. It's possible the child in question was biologically mature for his chronological age (or whoever reported this may have been guessing his age incorrectly). Either way, the whole secrecy aspect makes it pretty revolting, to say the least. It would have been just as revolting had it been out in the open, but then it would have been unlikely to have taken place at all...
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
lurkernomore20002000 wrote: How? What?, Where? Does this happen? And you're saying Andy was not totally enlightened? He got away with pedopoilia right under your nose. Must be a pretty good diversion to keep everyone's attention away from his molesting children. He robbed the bank when the security guards were around. Not sure how one does that. And how old were the kids? Edg: Andy's method is to grant free admission to various kids if one of their parents sign up for a day long Self Inquiry course. At the sessions I attended, there were always about ten boys between, say 10 and 16 years old. During the sessions he would engage these boys beyond all propriety by plying them with questions that brought them into making statements that showed that they understood what Andy was talking about. The boys who were best at this got very high praise from Andy in front of the group, and this spurred them to focus even more and come out with more statements that were hardly more than parroting back what Andy just had said. Andy would call a boy up to the front and have them answer questions from the crowd, saying, Here, let Johnny answer that -- he's got it down pat. The kid would be beaming in pride. After a session, Andy would pull aside the parents and tell them the following: Your son is about to reach enlightenment -- I can tell this, but it's a very very tender time, and I can help them as they process this transition by letting them pal around with me and spontaneously ask me questions about their quickly evolving experiences, and thus I'll rapidly deepen their clarity right there while the iron's hot about what's going on and this will speed up their realization. He'd say the above, and then he'd invite two or three of the boys to watch movies and hang out in his recreational vehicle -- a bed on wheels as it turns out. Somewhere in the day, the kid calls and asks if he can stay into the night because things are going well and he's having a wonderful time. What the parents are not told is that the other boys have been sent home and only one kid (sometimes more) is going to be there alone with Andy. Then, having gotten the kid isolated and pumped up about his pending enlightenment and being Andy's new best friend, Andy tells the kid that to be enlightened is to be beyond all attachment, and that a traditional way of showing that was to do things which one deeply did not want to do when one was that old personality pre-enlightenment. So, Andy encourages the kid to smoke, watch sexy movies and then when the timing is right: he says, You're very close now, I can tell. What you need now is one giant step forward in losing your attachments and the best way to do that is to blow me. By Andy's processing the bigger groups, he finds those boys whose gender identities are weak -- a fatherless upbringing, a boy who's gotten into delinquency, a boy with true psychiatric difficulties, and/or a boy with a distraught parent who hopes Andy will suddenly change their kid's ways, and probably his gay-dar does a lot for him too. By carefully picking, he get much higher odds that his above method will work. I have all the above from a person who experienced it first hand, and I absolutely trust that the facts are as I stated above regarding what goes on in Andy's RV -- this person is telling me the truth as far as every intuition al bone in my body can tell. And, of course, I actually witnessed Andy doing his pre-screenings. When I finally got the testimonial from the person the above, it was only then that Andy's methods popped out clearly to me -- he is savvy and smart and subtle -- and it was only then that I could see how his sessions spent way too much time with kids who really had mostly been dragged to the meetings by their parents. He was wasting everyone's time -- except his. At the time, I thought he was being very loving to spend so much time with kids. I try to track what he's doing -- now and then -- so that I can at least be sure he's not offering courses -- especially in Fairfield. If I find out he's doing anything in public and it's, say, within a thousand miles, I'm going to drive there and confront him in the most rageful fashion I can without getting arrested. Believe me, no one at any session will be able to trust Andy after I scream for even one minute. And if I get lucky, Andy will attack me physically, and then I hope that my last five years of fitness will allow me to mop the floor with the bastard's face. As a parent myself, I know that it doesn't take much of a warning from another parent to open their eyes or at least give them enough doubt to do safety-first regarding their children. When I found all this out, I had moved from Fairfield and Andy had stopped his courses. If anyone knows that he's pulling the same shit, tell me. Edg
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Duveyoung Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 2:35 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc When I found all this out, I had moved from Fairfield and Andy had stopped his courses. If anyone knows that he's pulling the same shit, tell me. I will if he ever tries to come back here, and if you ever come to town, give me a call so we can take a walk or a Trikke lesson or something. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1446 - Release Date: 5/16/2008 7:42 AM
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andy's method is to grant free admission to various kids if one of their parents sign up for a day long Self Inquiry course. At the sessions I attended, there were always about ten boys between, say 10 and 16 years old. During the sessions he would engage these boys beyond all propriety by plying them with questions that brought them into making statements that showed that they understood what Andy was talking about This was posted anonymously to FFL by someone claiming to be the mother of a boy who had just such an encounter: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/9592
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Andy's method is to grant free admission to various kids if one of their parents sign up for a day long Self Inquiry course. At the sessions I attended, there were always about ten boys between, say 10 and 16 years old. During the sessions he would engage these boys beyond all propriety by plying them with questions that brought them into making statements that showed that they understood what Andy was talking about This was posted anonymously to FFL by someone claiming to be the mother of a boy who had just such an encounter: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/9592 One sick bastard. Established in UC? No way. Just another pathetic pedophile.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Edg, really, thanks a million for sharing this. It is really fascinating to see a pro at work like this. How audacious, and absolutely committed he must have been to this agenda. It almost sounds like he had really bought into the idea that he was doing good somehow. I knew Andy from my six month course as I have discussed before. I was somewhat in awe of him, having gone straight from a TTC to the first six month course. And Andy was in my small group. I remember him talking to Bill Locke on the bus ride to Courcheval, (or it may have been to a different town we were going to), and telling Bill details of what the town was going to look like, before we even got there. Have no idea if it was accurate or not. But, the balls, the outright audacity to pull this off as he did. But then again, maybe this is the m-o of most predators. Obviously they pick out the most vulnerable, as described by the traits you list. Andy tailored his method to his target audience. The predator is obviously a highly motivated individual. I enjoyed your end of post plan to confront him. That would be neat. I have, on ocassion, been in a position where I have stood up and confronted an issue in similiar fashion. Last I picked up from chatter here, Andy had enlisted in the Sai Baba community. Seems strange. How would he fit in there? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: lurkernomore20002000 wrote: How? What?, Where? Does this happen? And you're saying Andy was not totally enlightened? He got away with pedopoilia right under your nose. Must be a pretty good diversion to keep everyone's attention away from his molesting children. He robbed the bank when the security guards were around. Not sure how one does that. And how old were the kids? Edg: Andy's method is to grant free admission to various kids if one of their parents sign up for a day long Self Inquiry course. At the sessions I attended, there were always about ten boys between, say 10 and 16 years old. During the sessions he would engage these boys beyond all propriety by plying them with questions that brought them into making statements that showed that they understood what Andy was talking about. The boys who were best at this got very high praise from Andy in front of the group, and this spurred them to focus even more and come out with more statements that were hardly more than parroting back what Andy just had said. Andy would call a boy up to the front and have them answer questions from the crowd, saying, Here, let Johnny answer that -- he's got it down pat. The kid would be beaming in pride. After a session, Andy would pull aside the parents and tell them the following: Your son is about to reach enlightenment -- I can tell this, but it's a very very tender time, and I can help them as they process this transition by letting them pal around with me and spontaneously ask me questions about their quickly evolving experiences, and thus I'll rapidly deepen their clarity right there while the iron's hot about what's going on and this will speed up their realization. He'd say the above, and then he'd invite two or three of the boys to watch movies and hang out in his recreational vehicle -- a bed on wheels as it turns out. Somewhere in the day, the kid calls and asks if he can stay into the night because things are going well and he's having a wonderful time. What the parents are not told is that the other boys have been sent home and only one kid (sometimes more) is going to be there alone with Andy. Then, having gotten the kid isolated and pumped up about his pending enlightenment and being Andy's new best friend, Andy tells the kid that to be enlightened is to be beyond all attachment, and that a traditional way of showing that was to do things which one deeply did not want to do when one was that old personality pre- enlightenment. So, Andy encourages the kid to smoke, watch sexy movies and then when the timing is right: he says, You're very close now, I can tell. What you need now is one giant step forward in losing your attachments and the best way to do that is to blow me. By Andy's processing the bigger groups, he finds those boys whose gender identities are weak -- a fatherless upbringing, a boy who's gotten into delinquency, a boy with true psychiatric difficulties, and/or a boy with a distraught parent who hopes Andy will suddenly change their kid's ways, and probably his gay-dar does a lot for him too. By carefully picking, he get much higher odds that his above method will work. I have all the above from a person who experienced it first hand, and I absolutely trust that the facts are as I stated above regarding what goes on in Andy's RV -- this person is telling me the truth as far as every intuition al bone in my body can tell. And, of course, I actually
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Why can't a pedophile be in UC? --- sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Andy's method is to grant free admission to various kids if one of their parents sign up for a day long Self Inquiry course. At the sessions I attended, there were always about ten boys between, say 10 and 16 years old. During the sessions he would engage these boys beyond all propriety by plying them with questions that brought them into making statements that showed that they understood what Andy was talking about This was posted anonymously to FFL by someone claiming to be the mother of a boy who had just such an encounter: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/9592 One sick bastard. Established in UC? No way. Just another pathetic pedophile. Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why can't a pedophile be in UC? I don't know about a pedophile, I'm not exactly the expert on UC, but this guy sure ain't in it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When I found all this out, I had moved from Fairfield and Andy had stopped his courses. If anyone knows that he's pulling the same shit, tell me. Edg How long did you live in Fairfield Edg?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
sandiego108 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why can't a pedophile be in UC? I don't know about a pedophile, I'm not exactly the expert on UC, but this guy sure ain't in it. Unless enlightenment turns you into a sexual deviant. :D New book title: The Sexual Lives of Saints and Mystics. Someone call Oprah.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
I recall a guy on our sidhis course who talked about seeing Gurudev floating in lotus position on a lottos blossom floating in a fountain of cherry juice. The Sidhis Course Administrator blinked a few times and carefully said we might chalk that up to 'beautiful unstressing...' Lawson Nice image!...sounds like the Sidhis Course Administrator didn't have a clue. This exchange lies at the heart of one of my favorite questions: By what criteria do we evaluate the validity of subjective experiences? The person on the course with the Guru Dev Float with a cherry on top was using the authority of the administrators, and presumably Maharishi who trained them, to judge if their subjective experience was valid. In my experience in the movement there always seemed to be a pretty strong skeptical angle taken on such experiences with details like that. But if the person was to make it a bit more abstract: I experienced my self welling up like a fountain of sweet golden bliss and the fullness began to manifest into the vibrations of the Veda... The chances that this person would get the big attaboy from the powers that be would be much higher. (I think Rajas and other mighty mites also get a pass on detailed Guru Dev, or now Maharishi, Zombie experiences. They could tell everyone that Guru Dev played ping pong with them that morning and the whole movement would gasp a collective Wow, that's heavy. You are s special. Would you bless my beads...no? How about blessing my Blackberry? So can others evaluate such experiences? Do people think that Maharishi had a magical way of knowing what someone was experiencing inside? Did he or his minions just give you a once over to see if you appeared to be a dipshit, and if you gave off dipshit vibes they assumed it was phony? There seemed to be an inordinate number of hot chicks whose experiences got a positive nod...celestial vision, that sort of thing. Does hotness give you a pass? I've had my own experiences, I know how compelling they feel. I've taken the position that the mind is a wonderful thing and capable of all sorts of detailed compelling experiences, but that we generally suck at distinguishing fact from fantasy with subjective experiences. Any perspective input is welcome. And my premise is that making such distinctions in life really does matter. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Hey, you forgot to put Andy Rymer on the list of folks who Maharishi declare enlightened. Maharishi did not declare Andy to be enlightened. Rather the opposite accuately as he ask him wheteher what he saw, the Gods, Krisha and all that, was perhaps a dream. If he said yes he'd be on to something; closer to enlightenment than had he declared them real. I recall a guy on our sidhis course who talked about seeing Gurudev floating in lotus position on a lottos blossom floating in a fountain of cherry juice. The Sidhis Course Administrator blinked a few times and carefully said we might chalk that up to 'beautiful unstressing...' Lawson Nice image!...sounds like the Sidhis Course Administrator didn't have a clue.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
On May 15, 2008, at 8:26 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote: I recall a guy on our sidhis course who talked about seeing Gurudev floating in lotus position on a lottos blossom floating in a fountain of cherry juice. The Sidhis Course Administrator blinked a few times and carefully said we might chalk that up to 'beautiful unstressing...' Lawson Nice image!...sounds like the Sidhis Course Administrator didn't have a clue. This exchange lies at the heart of one of my favorite questions: By what criteria do we evaluate the validity of subjective experiences? It is something you should be instructed in by an expert in your tradition. If you're not, then you're at a serious disadvantage IMO. The person on the course with the Guru Dev Float with a cherry on top was using the authority of the administrators, and presumably Maharishi who trained them, to judge if their subjective experience was valid. In my experience in the movement there always seemed to be a pretty strong skeptical angle taken on such experiences with details like that. But if the person was to make it a bit more abstract: I experienced my self welling up like a fountain of sweet golden bliss and the fullness began to manifest into the vibrations of the Veda... The chances that this person would get the big attaboy from the powers that be would be much higher. (I think Rajas and other mighty mites also get a pass on detailed Guru Dev, or now Maharishi, Zombie experiences. They could tell everyone that Guru Dev played ping pong with them that morning and the whole movement would gasp a collective Wow, that's heavy. You are s special. Would you bless my beads...no? How about blessing my Blackberry? Yeah, well therein lies the problem with meditational experiences. Unless you're trained in how to handle them from someone who has traversed the entire trip your part of, you're left in limbo. I would (personally) take that as a warning sign. In general meditation experiences are to be acknowledged, but not doted over. Otherwise you're just creating attachment to the root of what your body is trying to purify or work out (i.e. you're doing the opposite of what your sadhana is supposed to be achieving: freedom from constructs of all kinds). It's interesting to look at the definition of the Tibetan term for meditational experiences (nyams), as it gives some idea: a feeling; a vision; spoiled; defiled; corrupted; degenerated; deterioration feeling-sentiment, failures, soul Meditation mood TMer translation: Inner Moodmaking. Conversely there are techniques that are designed to produce certain experiences, however in such a case the student should receive precise instructions on how to handle them. For example: some techniques might be to produce as many intense experiences as possible without the student being perturbed whatsoever, to establish the strength of your non-attachment and freedom in actual practice. They can instill imperturbability in such an instance. Others might generate all sorts of experiences so one can learn to grok that, despite the great differences in various experiences, all hold the same core presence, which is unchanging. Again this is to free oneself from distraction. Some experiences are signs of certain types of meditative progress, in which case one acknowledges them and simply moves on. Lingering over a sign would be like taking a road trip and wallowing over a speed limit sign and how beautiful or ugly it is, all the while stalled on your journey. In cases where the mind perseverates over an expereince over and over, it tends to block ones progress and also can assure the same experience will not repeat itself. The egoic sense of I and separation is thereby strengthened.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Great topic Curtis. I fully agree with you that these sorts of experience can be very compelling. Off the top of my head here are some orthogonal 'scales' on which the evaluation of a subjective experience might be situated: 1. Realness (vague-real): How real does the experience seem? Is Guru Dev sitting right there in front of my with my eyes open, or is it only a vague impression? Etc. 3. Subjective call-to-action (no action implied-compelled to action): to what extent does the experience encourage or compel me to change my behaviour. For example, if Guru Dev tells me I should become a vegetarian to what extent do I feel that I really must do this? 3. Objectivity (subjective-objective): Do I acknowledge that the experience, while it might seem very real to me, might not be something that is real for other people. For example, do I accept that others may not see Guru Dev even if AFAIK he's sitting right in front of them? (I guess that somehow lumped up in this category there might also be considerations of whether or not an experience conforms to things like Jungian archetypes - if it does, does this make it a bit more 'objective' in some sense?). 4. Objective call-to-action (no action implied-compelled to action): Unlike the other scales, this applies if the experience is someone else's. How legitimate is it to prescribe some specific action or behaviour on the basis of a reported experience? For example, is it legitimate to say 'you are enlightened are therefore you should...' or 'you are unstressing and therefore you should...)? So, if I accept for a given experience that 'Objectivity' and 'Subjective call-to-action' are both low, then no matter how the experience scores on Realness it seems that there are no particular implications. This seems to be how you interepret your experiences, Curtis?? But if 'Objectivity' and 'Subjective call-to-action' are otherwise then folks might see things more like Jim (to me Jim seem to interpret his Guru Dev experience as 'high' on Realness and Objectivity, but 'low' on Subjective call-to-action (as he seem to behave in a pretty 'ordinary' way and also doesn't seek to convert or persuade us). Or someone like Maharishi might score high on all 4 scales. Not sure if this is going anywhere though :-) Geoff --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recall a guy on our sidhis course who talked about seeing Gurudev floating in lotus position on a lottos blossom floating in a fountain of cherry juice. The Sidhis Course Administrator blinked a few times and carefully said we might chalk that up to 'beautiful unstressing...' Lawson Nice image!...sounds like the Sidhis Course Administrator didn't have a clue. This exchange lies at the heart of one of my favorite questions: By what criteria do we evaluate the validity of subjective experiences? The person on the course with the Guru Dev Float with a cherry on top was using the authority of the administrators, and presumably Maharishi who trained them, to judge if their subjective experience was valid. In my experience in the movement there always seemed to be a pretty strong skeptical angle taken on such experiences with details like that. But if the person was to make it a bit more abstract: I experienced my self welling up like a fountain of sweet golden bliss and the fullness began to manifest into the vibrations of the Veda... The chances that this person would get the big attaboy from the powers that be would be much higher. (I think Rajas and other mighty mites also get a pass on detailed Guru Dev, or now Maharishi, Zombie experiences. They could tell everyone that Guru Dev played ping pong with them that morning and the whole movement would gasp a collective Wow, that's heavy. You are s special. Would you bless my beads...no? How about blessing my Blackberry? So can others evaluate such experiences? Do people think that Maharishi had a magical way of knowing what someone was experiencing inside? Did he or his minions just give you a once over to see if you appeared to be a dipshit, and if you gave off dipshit vibes they assumed it was phony? There seemed to be an inordinate number of hot chicks whose experiences got a positive nod...celestial vision, that sort of thing. Does hotness give you a pass? I've had my own experiences, I know how compelling they feel. I've taken the position that the mind is a wonderful thing and capable of all sorts of detailed compelling experiences, but that we generally suck at distinguishing fact from fantasy with subjective experiences. Any perspective input is welcome. And my premise is that making such distinctions in life really does matter. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote:
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Curtis wrote: By what criteria do we evaluate the validity of subjective experiences? Subject experiences can only be validated by epistemology - the valid means of knowledge. The valid means of knowledge are: Inference Sense perception Verbal testimony According to René Descartes, the senses are not infallible, so any concept of knowledge experienced through the senses are fallible. So, since sense perceptions cannot lead to a certain means of knowledge, any argument will lead to an infinite regress or rank skepticism, or worse, that nothing can be known, nihilism. So, nobody can actually evaluate a subjective experience - it could have been a dream or an illusion. There is not a single subjective experience that cannot have been a dream. In dreams you can run and jump and consult your friends. The only true knowledge is a priori, that is, knowledge that is transcendental to the senses. That knowledge is obtained through a process of introspection, going beyond sense perception. All other knowledge is like a dream, an appearance, not real yet not quite unreal either - it is an appearance only, just like an illusion or a dream.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Curtis wrote: By what criteria do we evaluate the validity of subjective experiences? Vaj wrote: It is something you should be instructed in by an expert in your tradition. That's knowledge by verbal testimony. But that is not a very good source of valid knowledge. Your friend or teacher may be in error. For example, your teacher may say I saw a thief in the night but in reality he saw a fence post in the dark. And your friend or teacher may have simply heard about the thief - that means that your friend's friend or teacher may have been in error as well. Verbal testimony is not always a source of valid knowledge. Verbal knowledge includes the scriptures as well, which might have included verbal testimony that someone in the past once saw a thief in the night. [snip] a feeling; a vision; spoiled; defiled; corrupted; degenerated; deterioration feeling-sentiment, failures, soul Meditation mood Exactly. Lingering over a sign would be like taking a road trip and wallowing over a speed limit sign and how beautiful or ugly it is, all the while stalled on your journey. Actually, the speed limit sign is an example of sense perception, and there's no harm in lingering awhile to admire it. But it would be a mistake if you were driving down a West Texas highway and you ran off the road to avoid a 'wet spot' on the road, when you know that it hasn't rained in six months!
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Curtis, The movement leaders encouraged us to go with subjective speculations quite a bit, but not nearly so much as Maharishi himself was allowed to do. Maharishi was THE major violator of the standard TM advice that we not give much importance to experiences during meditation since just about anything can be manifested by an unstressing mind and dust will fly during cleaning -- like that. We all had this experience in person or by watching video tapes: there was Maharishi with 1500 children (see me in row 37 at 25 years old?) asking them to come to the mike and tell their experiences. The old thorn to remove a thorn permission given to himself thingie. The reason I mentioned Andy Rymer when that list of folks known to be in CC got posted was that Maharishi spent so much time with Andy on the mike, (about an hour?) and furthermore that that session was one that was allowed to be heard by all the faithful in the centers as a Wednesday night lecture. Or, maybe it was only at resident courses...I'm blurry about it. I don't remember much about it decades later, but I do very much remember that Maharishi played the session like Andy was a shill in the crowd around a three card Monte game in Manhattan. Unless I hear that tape again and find out that I was totally projecting into that session, I'm testifying right now that Maharishi's handling of Andy clearly allowed us all to conclude that, yep, that there right there was an enlightened follower of Maharishi -- UC Andy. And that we should be next to pop any second donchaknow. From that moment on, UC Andy was the universally used moniker for him, and NO ONE in the movement ever officially chided us cattle for believing and espousing and disseminating that notion. No official warnings to deny Andy that title -- except the usual blurb about our not being a position to tell such things except for Maharishi. But no denial of what Maharishi LED US ALL INTO THINKING. Then there was GC Judy, CC Meadow and Greg, and others that were commonly touted to be in higher states. These folks took those various accolades and leveraged them for social privileges and, yep, again the movement was allowing this to happen in its ranks without much resistance if any. In other words, Maharishi worked us like a barker on the midway jowling a group of hayseeds into a hearty slavering and being told to buy a ticket to see the hoochy-coochy girls for a dollar. Come one, come all, see the Utterly Huge Head of Andy the Giant Spirit. Of all the enlightened, Andy seems to have made the most money from leveraging it, and certainly, when he hit Fairfield with his Self Inquiry courses, the concept that Maharishi said he was in Unity was still, even at that late date a very big dynamic in the Fairfield community. And for all the destruction of lives that Andy then caused by leveraging his position into a constant stream of boys into his bed, I hold Maharishi responsible -- not quite as responsible as the parents that allowed Andy to maraud and rape, but quite responsible. To define enlightenment as a state in which a person can do no wrong and then to designate a person in the crowd of true believers as such, was to give that person tremendous power to abuse the community. And certainly, if anyone ever understood the power of folks think I'm enlightened, Maharishi did. No other way to interpret it: Maharishi created a monster right before our eyes and no one even blinked. When I found out about Andy's pedophilia, it was the final straw for me -- it broke my true believerism for all time -- not that it hadn't been eroding all along, but for someone to be so evil in our midst and for so many to support it by being mindfully deluded and mood making and then have it all become a house of cards collapsed by a mere breeze was, for me, a final proof that in the very marrow of the bones of the TM body politic was a festering vile rot that was fostered by all of us -- including our Guru who should have known what he was doing. And since Maharishi didn't see that coming, and since Andy's evil was an absolute, it came down to this: that I too was as guilty for whatever part I played in the deal -- no matter how small -- why? -- cause my true believer denial processes were the foundation of it all -- without me and those in the crowd like me, it couldn't have happened. I attended Andy's Self Inquiry course and saw him working the boys in the crowd, and later when people testified to me about Andy's pedophilia, it all suddenly clicked into place what he was doing in those Self Inquiry sessions, and I felt as dirty as I imagined Andy to be -- for I was in that crowd, and I was modeling to everyone by paying good money to sit there and watch the God man perpetrating a vicious attack on the well being of everyone in the room. While all of us cooed and smiled and were smug about being there. Try to wash that sin off your soul. Try to look in a mirror and think you've ever once
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
On May 15, 2008, at 10:45 AM, Richard J. Williams wrote: Curtis wrote: By what criteria do we evaluate the validity of subjective experiences? Vaj wrote: It is something you should be instructed in by an expert in your tradition. That's knowledge by verbal testimony. gracious snip Not quite, it's a master of a certain practice giving an oral transmission (agama or upadesha). The oral transmission follows the abhisheka or empowerment. Thus one receives the teaching at the level of a Buddhas Mind, a Buddhas Speech and the Buddha's Body. Ultimately the teacher was never separate from your primordial condition.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
On May 15, 2008, at 11:02 AM, Duveyoung wrote: If I'm ever unlucky enough to meet one of the Rajas, the above is the first thing I'll bring to his attention. And not in a civil fashion. Make sure you take a video camera for gawds sake! YouTube is waiting.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Duveyoung wrote: [snip] And for all the destruction of lives that Andy then caused by leveraging his position into a constant stream of boys into his bed, I hold Maharishi responsible -- not quite as responsible as the parents that allowed Andy to maraud and rape, but quite responsible. Thank you, Sir, you have certainly taken this forum to a new level of spiritual insight and truth. But, why is it that it always come back to sex with you guys? I already told you I'm not gay! So, why would you be wanting to know where Andy is these days?
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recall a guy on our sidhis course who talked about seeing Gurudev floating in lotus position on a lottos blossom floating in a fountain of cherry juice. The Sidhis Course Administrator blinked a few times and carefully said we might chalk that up to 'beautiful unstressing...' Lawson Nice image!...sounds like the Sidhis Course Administrator didn't have a clue. This exchange lies at the heart of one of my favorite questions: By what criteria do we evaluate the validity of subjective experiences? snip Good question-- my initial reaction to it was who cares? Because if it is one person evaluating another person's experiences that cannot be validated in a material way (e.g. Bill called me on the phone. How do you know? I recorded it-- here, listen...), the value is primarily with the person who had the experience. There is not much value in sharing such an experience, unless the sharer thinks there is a benefit to the sharee...or just wants to talk about it. So how do I personally account for the validity of my own or someone else's subjective experiences? Being a very visual and artistic type from one angle of my personality, I tend to trust my experiences as they are. Someone responded regarding how compelling the experiences may be. Great test- Excellent test. Because there is nothing like validating an experience by acting on it or sharing it. it will either go away or I will find myself in deep goo, or it validates the experience. Again, Great test. Another thing that works for me is how much I integrate the experience into my life, along the same lines of how compelling is it. If it just sits there and then fades into memory, it may have been real but not of much value. If on the other hand it provides a doorway to significant growth, then I value it more. Finally, there is a intuitive piece that comes about for me automatically-- When I have had strong non provable subjective experience they are accompanied by strong visuals. A good example is the problem someone close to me experienced recently with their neck. When I focused on it, I got a very clear image of a sun made of yellow electricity with jagged edges. I could feel the energy signature of their nerve pain. I worked on transmuting and disappating the yellow with jagged endges into diffuse white light. They noticed an instant improvement. I have had innumerable such experiences like that- some spiritual and some not. The more of them I have the more obvious to me what they are and how to proceed. Got to get back to work-- thanks for a great question. Guru Dev with a cherry on top will have to wait...
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
Comment below: ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recall a guy on our sidhis course who talked about seeing Gurudev floating in lotus position on a lottos blossom floating in a fountain of cherry juice. The Sidhis Course Administrator blinked a few times and carefully said we might chalk that up to 'beautiful unstressing...' Lawson Nice image!...sounds like the Sidhis Course Administrator didn't have a clue. This exchange lies at the heart of one of my favorite questions: By what criteria do we evaluate the validity of subjective experiences? The person on the course with the Guru Dev Float with a cherry on top was using the authority of the administrators, and presumably Maharishi who trained them, to judge if their subjective experience was valid. In my experience in the movement there always seemed to be a pretty strong skeptical angle taken on such experiences with details like that. But if the person was to make it a bit more abstract: I experienced my self welling up like a fountain of sweet golden bliss and the fullness began to manifest into the vibrations of the Veda... The chances that this person would get the big attaboy from the powers that be would be much higher. (I think Rajas and other mighty mites also get a pass on detailed Guru Dev, or now Maharishi, Zombie experiences. They could tell everyone that Guru Dev played ping pong with them that morning and the whole movement would gasp a collective Wow, that's heavy. You are s special. Would you bless my beads...no? How about blessing my Blackberry? So can others evaluate such experiences? Do people think that Maharishi had a magical way of knowing what someone was experiencing inside? Did he or his minions just give you a once over to see if you appeared to be a dipshit, and if you gave off dipshit vibes they assumed it was phony? There seemed to be an inordinate number of hot chicks whose experiences got a positive nod...celestial vision, that sort of thing. Does hotness give you a pass? I've had my own experiences, I know how compelling they feel. I've taken the position that the mind is a wonderful thing and capable of all sorts of detailed compelling experiences, but that we generally suck at distinguishing fact from fantasy with subjective experiences. Any perspective input is welcome. And my premise is that making such distinctions in life really does matter. **snip to end** Curtis, my (partial and somewhat tangential) take on this is that whether or not the experience is available to any objective confirmation is one thing, but the value of the experience to the subject is what's real, regardless. In other words, the experience of something red in a dream doesn't mean that the red object of the dream has/had any objective reality but I know red when I see red and the experience of redness in the dream itself was real and to the degree that experiencing redness that one more time, or experiencing that particular hue (maybe a red that isn't available in the objective world) has implications, either small or large, to me an an experiencer and a knower of anything. So it always does seem to come down to how you operate or express whatever your knowingness is in the world. In my own head I keep coming back to New.Morning's definition of any enlightenment worth having is one that generates positive effects both in the individual and in the individual's sphere of influence (and therefore, by extrapolation, to the world at large). If you keep getting great experiences but operate primarily as a shitheel, it doesn't necessarily mean that you're not merely witnessing that reality (and consequently enlightened under that criterion), but so what? The Tao Te Ching seems to give the best traditional/cultural guide as to how to evaluate a superior person that gives me a sense of the value of higher states of consciousness for me. It's not inconsistent with what Maharishi taught nor with Advaita, but clearly relates that someone who knows the Tao flows with circumstances as they develop and utilizes everything that comes his/her way with grace and kindness and intelligence. Patience, forebearance, humility, friendliness, compassion, happiness -- good qualities, all, and what I desire for myself and others as the anticipated and growing fruits of awakening. Or even as my old SRM lapel pin has inscribed around the little bas-relief image of Guru Dev: Peace, Energy, Happiness -- that's good enough for me.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recall a guy on our sidhis course who talked about seeing Gurudev floating in lotus position on a lottos blossom floating in a fountain of cherry juice. The Sidhis Course Administrator blinked a few times and carefully said we might chalk that up to 'beautiful unstressing...' Lawson Nice image!...sounds like the Sidhis Course Administrator didn't have a clue. This exchange lies at the heart of one of my favorite questions: By what criteria do we evaluate the validity of subjective experiences? The person on the course with the Guru Dev Float with a cherry on top was using the authority of the administrators, and presumably Maharishi who trained them, to judge if their subjective experience was valid. In my experience in the movement there always seemed to be a pretty strong skeptical angle taken on such experiences with details like that. But if the person was to make it a bit more abstract: I experienced my self welling up like a fountain of sweet golden bliss and the fullness began to manifest into the vibrations of the Veda... The chances that this person would get the big attaboy from the powers that be would be much higher. (I think Rajas and other mighty mites also get a pass on detailed Guru Dev, or now Maharishi, Zombie experiences. They could tell everyone that Guru Dev played ping pong with them that morning and the whole movement would gasp a collective Wow, that's heavy. You are s special. Would you bless my beads...no? How about blessing my Blackberry? So can others evaluate such experiences? Do people think that Maharishi had a magical way of knowing what someone was experiencing inside? Did he or his minions just give you a once over to see if you appeared to be a dipshit, and if you gave off dipshit vibes they assumed it was phony? There seemed to be an inordinate number of hot chicks whose experiences got a positive nod...celestial vision, that sort of thing. Does hotness give you a pass? I've had my own experiences, I know how compelling they feel. I've taken the position that the mind is a wonderful thing and capable of all sorts of detailed compelling experiences, but that we generally suck at distinguishing fact from fantasy with subjective experiences. Any perspective input is welcome. And my premise is that making such distinctions in life really does matter. I'm not sure how anyone could evaluate one vision of GD as any more genuine than another unless one is symbolic of a deeper state being reached, the example of deep golden bliss bubbling up might represent the TM concept of creation from the level of the unified field. Might be a big indicator of someone really getting down to business, which is what I imagine a TM teacher would be looking out for if running a course. I've never seen anything visual like GD and would dismiss it as being pleasant but irrelevant, I think all visions of masters would be some sort of dream or hypnogogic imagery, not unreasonable for a follower of any path to see things like that, and TM often crosses from awareness to sleep. I've also always thought people's predispositions count a lot in the types of experiences they have. For instance, I knew a girl who, while menstruating, would often be visited by a spirit looking for a new bodywhen she was meditating. She was into angels and spirit guides and was after kids big time. Self fulfilling prophecy? I think so. The only experience I ever had that I had never read anything about was hearing the Ved. It was startling to the point that I jumped out of my chair. I had no idea what had just happened but it was like suddenly sticking my head into a total perspective vortex. Far out. I never mentioned it as it was years before I went on any courses. When I heard about it during a lecture on a course I told the teacher who was astonished and recommended I get on purusha pronto as the experience would stabilise. His way of evaluating it was whether I had any doubt it really happened. I think whether these things are subjective like dreams or symptomatic of altered physical brain function could be an interesting avenue to explore. Something like the hypothalamus theory Lawson related the other day. Could be the best way of evaluating them is whether it's a subjective dream type correlate of an objective phenomena.
[FairfieldLife] Re: How do we eva te subjective experiences? was:Some people who reached cc
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And for all the destruction of lives that Andy then caused by leveraging his position into a constant stream of boys into his bed, I hold Maharishi responsible -- not quite as responsible as the parents that allowed Andy to maraud and rape, but quite responsible. Last time this subject came up, I know I had some questions, but how does that work. I give most credit for our parenting to my wife, but pretty much, I know what is going on with my kids. I mean, I actually do know. How does someone molest children over any period of time, in what is supposedly a tight knit community, where people are focused on their children's welfare. I attended Andy's Self Inquiry course and saw him working the boys in the crowd, and later when people testified to me about Andy's pedophilia, it all suddenly clicked into place what he was doing in those Self Inquiry sessions, How? What?, Where? Does this happen? And you're saying Andy was not totally enlightened? He got away with pedopoilia right under your nose. Must be a pretty good diversion to keep everyone's attention away from his molesting children. He robbed the bank when the security guards were around. Not sure how one does that. And how old were the kids? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: I recall a guy on our sidhis course who talked about seeing Gurudev floating in lotus position on a lottos blossom floating in a fountain of cherry juice. The Sidhis Course Administrator blinked a few times and carefully said we might chalk that up to 'beautiful unstressing...' Lawson Nice image!...sounds like the Sidhis Course Administrator didn't have a clue. This exchange lies at the heart of one of my favorite questions: By what criteria do we evaluate the validity of subjective experiences? The person on the course with the Guru Dev Float with a cherry on top was using the authority of the administrators, and presumably Maharishi who trained them, to judge if their subjective experience was valid. In my experience in the movement there always seemed to be a pretty strong skeptical angle taken on such experiences with details like that. But if the person was to make it a bit more abstract: I experienced my self welling up like a fountain of sweet golden bliss and the fullness began to manifest into the vibrations of the Veda... The chances that this person would get the big attaboy from the powers that be would be much higher. (I think Rajas and other mighty mites also get a pass on detailed Guru Dev, or now Maharishi, Zombie experiences. They could tell everyone that Guru Dev played ping pong with them that morning and the whole movement would gasp a collective Wow, that's heavy. You are s special. Would you bless my beads...no? How about blessing my Blackberry? So can others evaluate such experiences? Do people think that Maharishi had a magical way of knowing what someone was experiencing inside? Did he or his minions just give you a once over to see if you appeared to be a dipshit, and if you gave off dipshit vibes they assumed it was phony? There seemed to be an inordinate number of hot chicks whose experiences got a positive nod...celestial vision, that sort of thing. Does hotness give you a pass? I've had my own experiences, I know how compelling they feel. I've taken the position that the mind is a wonderful thing and capable of all sorts of detailed compelling experiences, but that we generally suck at distinguishing fact from fantasy with subjective experiences. Any perspective input is welcome. And my premise is that making such distinctions in life really does matter. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sandiego108 sandiego108@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung no_reply@ wrote: Hey, you forgot to put Andy Rymer on the list of folks who Maharishi declare enlightened. Maharishi did not declare Andy to be enlightened. Rather the opposite accuately as he ask him wheteher what he saw, the Gods, Krisha and all that, was perhaps a dream. If he said yes he'd be on to something; closer to enlightenment than had he declared them real. I recall a guy on our sidhis course who talked about seeing Gurudev floating in lotus position on a lottos blossom floating in a fountain of cherry juice. The Sidhis Course Administrator blinked a few times and carefully said we might chalk that up to 'beautiful
